Thoughts on the military and military activities of a diverse nature. Free-ranging and eclectic.

Sunday, May 25, 2008

Security Clearance.


This is k’oolbert:

"Do you know why we are so strong? Because we are a unit, each of us is part of the greater whole, always under surveillance, even a Commander such as myself. Always under surveillance." - - Commander Kor of the Klingon Empire, as related to Captain Kirk of the Federation.

From a comment to the blog by JS Bolton:

"This is very alarming that the FBI and CIA would employ people [Nada Nadim Prouty] with obvious gaps in their identification, such that they have to just take some one's word as to who that person really is, and what their real connections might be."

Within the U.S. military, my understanding of the issuance of security clearances is that:

* A clearance level of CONFIDENTIAL can be issued merely upon the authority of the unit commander, at his/her discretion.

* A clearance level of SECRET can be issued by a national agency check alone. Clearance being granted by a records check turning up “no derogatory” information.

* A clearance level of TOP SECRET might require “levels” of investigation, each level more intrusive and exhaustive. Perhaps even including a polygraph exam [lie detector]!

All of this of course, normally accomplished AFTER a person has been enlisted and is serving in the U.S. military.

In contrast, according to Suvorov, within the Soviet military, the question of categorization and trustworthiness was handled in a far different manner:

"It does not occur to any of them [a convoy of raw recruits to the Red Army] that each of them has already been assessed, taking into account his POLITICAL RELIABILITY [my emphasis], his family's criminal record (or absence of one), participation (or failure to participate) in Communist mass meetings . . . They [the raw recruits] have no idea . . . that files exist on them which have long ago been checked and passed by the KGB."

We are speaking here of DRAFTEES inducted to serve two years of military service in a Soviet infantry division. A convoy [2,500 inductees] would have only two to three persons of Category Zero [0]. Zero being the highest level category, from the standpoint of physical and mental aptitude, AND political reliability, according to the judgements of the communist party!

Draftees, NOT KNOWING THAT AN EXHAUSTIVE BACKGROUND CHECK HAS BEEN DONE BEFORE INDUCTION INTO THE SOVIET MILITARY.

The two to three inductees per convoy rated as category zero [0] would be assigned to the Eighth [8th] Department of a Soviet divisional staff. Troops handling all cryptographic matters, securing the secret communications of the commander and his subordinates. ONLY TEN PERSONS TOTAL OUT OF A TEN THOUSAND TROOP STRONG DIVISIONAL UNIT WOULD BE CATEGORIZED AS BELONGING TO CATEGORY ZERO [0]!!

In addition, even with reliability and trustworthiness established, all these various defectors, from the old Soviet Union intelligence services tell stories of INFORMERS [STUKACHI] AND DELIBERATE AND MALICIOUS PROVOCATIONS PLACED IN FRONT OF “TRUSTED” PERSONNEL.

“Let us see what he will do in this situation!”

[I think that the big problem with Nada Prouty is that neither the FBI or the CIA was able to determine that Nada was [1] an illegal alien or [2] the sister-in-law and employee of a man [has fled the country] known to be a fund-raiser and money-launderer [alleged] for Hezbollah!!]

k’oolbert.

Labels:

1 Comments:

Blogger John S. Bolton said...

Not knowing where your trusted people are really from, is a gratuitous weakness by now. The government should use genetic testing to catch more otherwise undetectable associations with criminals here, or foreign connections. If they're related to military personnel of the last several decades, and you had the samples all tested, that would be an independent verification of identity. The government shouldn't endanger our national security with such excuses as that they are more anti-discrimination than someone else. An applicant for a security clearance is a supplicant, not an accused criminal on trial.

11:25 PM

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home